ಟಿವಿ ಪತ್ರಕರ್ತರಿಗೆ ನೀತಿ ಸಂಹಿತೆ ಬೇಡವೆ? ಅವರಿಗೆ ಬುದ್ಧಿ ಕಲಿಸುವವರ್ಯಾರು? - ಹೀಗೆ ನಾನಾ ಪ್ರಶ್ನೆಗಳನ್ನು ರಾಜಲಕ್ಷ್ಮಿ ಕೇಳಿದ್ದಾರೆ. ರಾಜಲಕ್ಷ್ಮಿ, ಅವರೇ ಹೇಳಿಕೊಂಡಂತೆ - ಟಿವಿ ವೀಕ್ಷಕರು. ಇತ್ತೀಚೆಗೆ ಮುಂಬೈ ಘಟನೆಗಳನ್ನು ಟಿವಿ ವಾಹಿನಿಗಳು ಬಿತ್ತರಿಸಿದ ಪರಿಯನ್ನು ಖಂಡಿಸಿ ನೆಟ್ವರ್ಕ್ ಆಫ್ ವೊಮೆನ್ ಇನ್ ಮೀಡಿಯ ಸಂಪಾದಕರಿಗೆ ಒಂದು ಪತ್ರ ಬರೆದಿದ್ದಾರೆ. ಈ ನಿಟ್ಟಿನಲ್ಲಿ ಚರ್ಚೆಯಾಗುವ ಅಗತ್ಯವಿದೆ ಎಂದಿದ್ದಾರೆ. ಅವರ ಪತ್ರ ಪೂರ್ಣಪಾಠ ಇಲ್ಲಿದೆ.
The mayhem in Mumbai
A few thoughts on TV coverage, which I thought you could publish and start a
debate since I think it is high time we brought under TV channels under some
kind of regulation.
First of all, was it necessary to provide 24-hour coverage of the hostage
crisis? Did it do anything for the viewers, the security forces, the
helpless hostages, Mumbai city or the nation except to make matters worse
for all concerned? According to the security forces, the TV channels had
helped the terrorists and were directly responsible for the death of the
Times of India journalist who was staying on the top floor of the Taj Mahal
Hotel. At the end of the day, after all the hysteria, the maniacal coverage
by the hordes of TV reporters it was the newspapers which gave us a proper
picture of what was happening along with some expert views which helped us
to understand the gravity of the situation. If you went by the TV coverage
it was just another circus for them where the usual shrieking brigade which
plays to the gallery by taking to task the politicians, the security
agencies, neighbouring countries, etc had a field day – for four whole days.
Why do the police, the army and the NSG, which is very good at picking on
drivers in Delhi who stray into the path of VIP cars, not clear the TV
channels from the area of operations? In the Western world you will not find
TV reporters behaving like fish wives and sticking their microphones into
the faces of hostages just released, much less badgering the security
forces. The channels were so keen on providing coverage that they were
willing to risk the lives of their reporters.
Why is there no code of conduct for TV reporters? Surely, their performance
over the past decade has given us ample cause for concern? Why do the
channels not give their reporters some training? Instead we are subject to
unprofessional, unethical and insensitive reportage, forced to endure the
verbal diarrhoea of reporters who come across as extraordinarily banal. I am
aware that it is not easy to keep talking intelligently for more than three
minutes at a stretch so why go in for an exercise where one is talking
mindlessly for hours on end?
Besides, nowhere else in the world, not on CNN (incidentally their coverage
was the best in my opinion with a good mixture of analysis and news
coverage), BBC, AL Jazeera, Iran TV or whatever) will you find reporters and
anchors hectoring and castigating whoever they think deserves to be ticked
off. The liberties Indian TV news channels take with panellists, security
officials, politicians and viewers is simply appalling.
Unfortunately, it is the senior reporters/anchors who are the worst
offenders. We had one editor-in-chief who claimed friendship with one of the
unfortunate ATS top brass who were killed in Mumbai. And what does he tell
the world? That Ashok Kamte won a banana-eating contest in his college days!
Is there no sense of a time and place for such revelations? Is there no
sanctity for any of us even in death? Some of his interviews with those who
had managed to escape were unbelievably fatuous and inappropriate. "Did you
expect such a thing to happen here? (!) Do you plan to come back to India?"
God help us all.
Sanctimoniousness is sometime harder to stomach than plain stupidity.
Another editor who heads a rival channel and is fond of telling viewers how
moral his channel is and believes it is fine to hector those taking a
different stance was put in his place when two experts he had called in told
him all TV channels had played into the hands of the terrorists by their
nauseating and endless coverage of the hostage drama.
Yet another star, famous for her dangerous and witless reporting from the
trenches, put on a suitably grave expression verging on the tearful, but
turned out to be the most insensitive of them all. When she was not busy
sticking the mike into the faces of all and sundry, even relatives gathered
outside the Taj Mahal Hotel desperately waiting for some news of their
captive kin, she was yelling on camera to fellow reporters ("you shut up")
or badgering the security people. Last seen, she had brushed past protesting
policemen and paramedical staff at the Taj around noon today (Saturday 29)
when they had just begun to clear the bodies to show us the sights. "Look at
this window, look at the damage here" before she was chased off.
If TV channels cannot teach their employees how to conduct themselves like
professionals, we need to ask the government and the security agencies to do
so. This is not the best option but would seem justified in the
circumstances. The security agencies also need to be given a code of
conduct: where to keep the media in such situations (at a distance where
they cannot do damage to others and themselves) and who should be briefing
them and when.
One TV channel told an irate viewer who complained about the unprofessional
coverage of the terror strike that she had the option not to watch. Is that
I hope this letter will provoke some introspection and some remedial action.
(A network of women who are related to media and who are working towards responsive, responsible and gender sensitive journalism.www.NWMINDIA.ORG )
ಯಾರು ಈ ರಾಜಲಕ್ಷ್ಮಿ? ಇವರೂ ಸಹ ಒಬ್ಬ ಸೆಕ್ಯೂಲರ್ ಚಿಂತಕರೇ? ಅಥವಾ ರಾಜಲಕ್ಷ್ಮೀಯವರೂ ಸಹ ಗೋಧ್ರಾ ಘಟನೆ ನಂತರ ಹುಟ್ಟಿದವರೇ? ಆಗಲೂ ಇದಕ್ಕಿಂತ ಭೀಕರವಾದ ಕವರೇಜನ್ನು ಟಿವಿ ಚಾನೆಲ್ ಗಳು ಕೊಟ್ಟಿದ್ದವು. ಆಗ ಚಾನೆಲ್ ಗಳಿಗೆ ನೀತಿ ಸಂಹಿತೆ ಬೇಕಿರಲಿಲ್ಲವೇ? ಮಾಲೇಗಾಂವ್ ಪ್ರಕರಣಕ್ಕೆ ಸಂಬಂಧಿಸಿದಂತೆ ಯಾವುದೇ ಸಾಕ್ಷಿ ಇಲ್ಲದಿದ್ದರೂ ಹಿಂದೂಗಳನ್ನು ಬಂಧಿಸಿದಾಗ ಟಿವಿ ಚಾನೆಲ್ ಗಳು 2-3 ದಿನ ಸ್ಯಾಫ್ರನ್ ಟೆರರ್ ಎಂದು ಹುಯಿಲೆಬ್ಬಿಸಿ, ಮುಸ್ಲೀಮರು, ಕಾಂಗ್ರೆಸ್ ನಾಯಕರು ಹೇಳುವುದೆಲ್ಲ ಪ್ರಸಾರ ಮಡಿದವು. ಆಗ ನೀತಿ ಸಂಹಿತಿ ಬೇಕು ಎನಿಸಲಿಲ್ಲವೇ? ಶಂಕಾರಾಚಾಯರನ್ನು ಅನಗತ್ಯವಾಗಿ ಬಂಧಿಸಿದಾಗ ಟಿವಿ ಚಾನೆಲ್ ಗಳು ಅವರೇ ಕೊಲೆಗಾರರು ಎಂಬಂತೆ ಬಿಂಬಿಸಿದ್ದರು. ಆಗ ನೀತಿ ಸಂಹಿತೆ ಬೇಕಿತ್ತು ಎನಿಸಲಿಲ್ಲವೇ? ಕರ್ ನಾಟಕದಲ್ಲಿ ಕ್ರಿಶ್ಚಿಯನ್ ರ ಮೇಲೆ ದಾಳಿಯನ್ನು ವ್ಯವಸ್ಥಿತವಾಗಿ ಇಂಗ್ಲೀಷ್ ಮಾಧ್ಯಮಗಳು ಬಿತ್ತರಿಸಿದವು. ಆಗ ನೀತಿ ಸಂಹಿತೆ ಬೇಕಿತ್ತು ಎನಿಸಲಿಲ್ಲವೇ? ಈಗ ಪಾಕಿಸ್ತಾನದ ಪಾತ್ರ, ಉಗ್ರರು ಮುಸ್ಲೀಮರು ಎಂಬುದು ಹೊರ ಬರುತ್ತಿದ್ದಂತೆಯೇ ನೀತಿ ಸಂಹಿತೆ ಬೇಕಿತ್ತು ಎನಿಸತೊಡಗಿತೆ? ನಿಮ್ಮ ಸೆಕ್ಯೂಲರ್, ಬುದ್ದಿ ಜೀವಿಗಳ ನೀತಿ ಸಂಹಿತೆಗೊಂದಿಷ್ಟು ಬೆಂಕಿ ಹಚ್ಚಾ!
ಸ್ವಾಮೀ, ರಾಜಲಕ್ಷ್ಮಿಯವರವರು ಬರೆದದ್ದು ಸರಿಯಾಗಿ ಇದೆ.
ಈಗ ಬ್ಲಾಗ್ಗಳಲ್ಲೂ ನಿಮ್ಮ ಮೀಡಿಯಾದವರ ಬಗ್ಗೆ ಹೇಗೆ ಬರೆದಿದ್ದಾರೆ ನೋಡಿ.
ದೇಸೀಮಾತು, ಬಾಳದೋಣಿ ಮತ್ತು ಇನ್ನೂ ಅನೇಕ ಬ್ಲಾಗ್ಗಳಲ್ಲಿ ಎಲೆಕ್ಟ್ರಾನಿಕ್ ಮಾಧ್ಯಮಗಳ ಕುರಿತು ಚೆನ್ನಾಗಿ ಬರೆದಿದ್ದಾರೆ.
khandita neeti sahmite bekitu. mumbai duranta kelavomme adu mathastu durantagalige prochande niduvantitu. innu kannada prabha da mukhya puta dalli mumbahyatoptadane emba heddingu kodalagide. idannu sariyagi grahasidare, adu muslim bayatopadane antalo, mumbai antalo odikollabahudu. adre, muslim endu odikondare... amayaka musalamanara mele anumaana shuruvagutave. journlisim ge neeti samhite beku endu annisuvudu agle.
Hotel Taj : icon of whose India ?
Gnani Sankaran- Tamil writer, Chennai.
Watching at least four English news channels surfing from one another during the last 60 hours of terror strike made me feel a terror of another kind. The terror of assaulting one's mind and sensitivity with cameras, sound bites and non-stop blabbers. All these channels have been trying to manufacture my consent for a big lie called - Hotel Taj
the icon of India.
Whose India, Whose Icon ?
It is a matter of great shame that these channels simply did not bother about the other icon that faced the first attack from terrorists - the Chatrapathi Shivaji Terminus (CST) railway station.
CST is the true icon of Mumbai. It is through this railway station hundreds of Indians from Uttar Pradesh, Bihar, Rajasthan, West Bengal and Tamilnadu have poured into Mumbai over the years, transforming themselves into Mumbaikars and built the Mumbai of today along with
the Marathis and Kolis
But the channels would not recognise this. Nor would they recognise the thirty odd dead bodies strewn all over the platform of CST. No Barkha dutt went there to tell us who they were. But she was at Taj to show us the damaged furniture and reception lobby braving the guards.
And the TV cameras did not go to the government run JJ hospital to find out who those 26 unidentified bodies were. Instead they were again invading the battered Taj to try in vain for a scoop shot of the dead bodies of the page 3 celebrities.
In all probability, the unidentified bodies could be those of workers from Bihar and Uttar Pradesh migrating to Mumbai, arriving by train at CST without cell phones and pan cards to identify them. Even after 60 hours after the CST massacre, no channel has bothered to cover in
detail what transpired there.
The channels conveniently failed to acknowledge that the Aam Aadmis of India surviving in Mumbai were not affected by Taj, Oberoi and Trident closing down for a couple of weeks or months. What mattered to them
was the stoppage of BEST buses and suburban trains even for one hour.
But the channels were not covering that aspect of the terror attack. Such information at best merited a scroll line, while the cameras have to be dedicated for real time thriller unfolding at Taj or Nariman bhavan.
The so called justification for the hype the channels built around heritage site Taj falling down (CST is also a heritage site), is that Hotel Taj is where the rich and the powerful of India and the globe congregate. It is a symbol or icon of power of money and politics, not
India. It is the icon of the financiers and swindlers of India. The Mumbai and India were built by the Aam Aadmis who passed through CST
and Taj was the oasis of peace and privacy for those who wielded power over these mass of labouring classes. Leopold club and Taj were the haunts of rich spoilt kids who would drive their vehicles over sleeping Aam Aadmis on the pavement, the Mafiosi of Mumbai forever
financing the glitterati of Bollywood (and also the terrorists) ,
Political brokers and industrialists.
It is precisely because Taj is the icon of power and not people, that the terrorists chose to strike.
The terrorists have understood after several efforts that the Aam Aadmi will never break down even if you bomb her markets and trains.
He/she was resilient because that is the only way he/she can even survive.
Resilience was another word that annoyed the pundits of news channels and their patrons this time. What resilience, enough is enough, said Pranoy Roy's channel on the left side of the channel spectrum. Same
sentiments were echoed by Arnab Goswami representing the right wing of the broadcast media whose time is now. Can Rajdeep be far behind in this game of one upmanship over TRPs ? They all attacked resilience
this time. They wanted firm action from the government in tackling terror.
The same channels celebrated resilience when bombs went off in trains and markets killing and maiming the Aam Aadmis. The resilience of the
ordinary worker suited the rich business class of Mumbai since work or manufacture or film shooting did not stop. When it came to them, the rich shamelessly exhibited their lack of nerves and refused to be
resilient themselves. They cry for government intervention now to protect their private spas and swimming pools and bars and restaurants, similar to the way in which Citibank, General Motors and the ilk cry for government money when their coffers are emptied by their own ideologies.
The terrorists have learnt that the ordinary Indian is unperturbed by terror. For one whose daily existence itself is a terror of government sponsored inflation and market sponsored exclusion, pain is something he has learnt to live with. The rich of Mumbai and India Inc are
facing the pain for the first time and learning about it just as the middle classes of India learnt about violation of human rights only during emergency, a cool 28 years after independence.
And human rights were another favourite issue for the channels to whip at times of terrorism.
Arnab Goswami in an animated voice wondered where were those champions of human rights now, not to be seen applauding the brave and selfless police officers who gave up their life in fighting terorism.
Well, the counter question would be where were you when such officers were violating the human rights of Aam Aadmis. Has there ever been any
24 hour non stop coverage of violence against dalits and adivasis of this country?
This definitely was not the time to manufacture consent for the extra legal and third degree methods of interrogation of police and army but
Arnabs don't miss a single opportunity to serve their class masters, this time the jingoistic patriotism came in handy to whitewash the entire uniformed services.
The sacrifice of the commandos or the police officers who went down dying at the hands of ruthless terrorists is no doubt heart rending but in vain in a situation which needed not just bran but also brain.
Israel has a point when it says the operations were misplanned resulting in the death of its nationals here.
Khakares and Salaskars would not be dead if they did not commit the mistake of traveling by the same vehicle. It is a basic lesson in management that the top brass should never t ravel together in crisis.
The terrorists, if only they had watched the channels, would have laughed their hearts out when the Chief of the Marine commandos, an elite force, masking his face so unprofessionally in a see-through cloth, told the media that the commandos had no idea about the
structure of the Hotel Taj which they were trying to liberate. But the terrorists knew the place thoroughly, he acknowledged.
Is it so difficult to obtain a ground plan of Hotel Taj and discuss operation strategy thoroughly for at least one hour before entering?
This is something even an event manager would first ask for, if he had to fix 25 audio systems and 50 CCtvs for a cultural event in a hotel.
Would not Ratan Tata have provided a plan of his ancestral hotel to the commandos within one hour considering the mighty apparatus at his
and government's disposal? Are satelite pictures only available for terrorists and not the government agencies ? In an operation known to consume time, one more hour for preparation would have only improved the efficiency of execution.
Sacrifices become doubly tragic in unprofessional circumstances. But the Aam Aadmis always believe that terror-shooters do better planning than terrorists. And the gullible media in a jingoistic mood would not
raise any question about any of these issues.
They after all have their favourite whipping boy - the politician the eternal entertainer for the non-voting rich classes of India.
Arnabs and Rajdeeps would wax eloquent on Nanmohan Singh and Advani visiting Mumbai separately and not together showing solidarity even at this hour of national crisis. What a farce? Why can't these channels
pool together all their camera crew and reporters at this time of national calamity and share the sound and visual bites which could mean a wider and deeper coverage of events with such a huge human resource to command? Why should Arnab and Rajdeep and Barkha keep
harping every five minutes that this piece of information was exclusive to their channel, at the time of such a national crisis? Is this the time to promote the channel? If that is valid, the politician
promoting his own political constituency is equally valid. And the duty of the politican is to do politics, his politics. It is for the people to evaluate that politics.
And terrorism is not above politics. It is politics by other means.
To come to grips with it and to eventually eliminate it, the practice of politics by proper means needs constant fine tuning and improvement. Decrying all politics and politicians, only helps
terrorists and dictators who are the two sides of the same coin. And the rich and powerful always prefer terrorists and dictators to do business with.
Those caught in this crossfire are always the Aam Aadmis whose deaths are not even mourned - the taxi driver who lost the entire family at CST firing, the numerous waiters and stewards who lost their lives
working in Taj for a monthly salary that would be one time bill for their masters.
Postscript: In a fit of anger and depression, I sent a message to all the channels, 30 hours through the coverage. After all they have been
constantly asking the viewers to message them for anything and everything. My message read: I send this with lots of pain. All channels, including yours, must apologise for not covering the victims
of CST massacre, the real mumbaikars and aam aadmis of India. Your obsession with five star elite is disgusting. Learn from the print
media please. No channel bothered. Only srinivasan Jain replied: you are right. We are trying to redress balance today. Well, nothing happened till the time of writing this 66 hours after the terror attack.
TV patrakartarigoo neeti samhite beku. Blog bareyuvavarigoo neeti samhite beku. Blog galige pratikriye needuvavarigoo neeti samhite beku. Neeti? Bhaaratadinda atyanta vegavaagi mareyaaguttiruva vastugalalli idoo ondu....
Pls.read this news published in Hindu.
Navy chief upset with electronic media
Mumbai coverage reminded him of ‘famous’ Kargil War shot
NEW DELHI: The Chief of the Naval Staff, Admiral Sureesh Mehta, has expressed anger at the electronic media’s coverage of the Mumbai terror attacks.
Addressing a press conference on the eve of Navy Day, he also pulled up the media for casting aspersions on the Navy’s sinking of a pirate vessel in the Gulf of Aden by “going all the way to the house of the vessel’s Thai owner” to interview him.
“All for brownie points”
The competition among news channels to score brownie points reminded him of the “famous shot” during the Kargil War that led to the destruction of an ultra-powerful artillery gun of the Army. Three soldiers died and the Colonel, who yielded to a woman reporter’s entreaty to fire the gun for the camera’s benefit was dismissed from service.
Senior government officials have been chafing at the “intrusive coverage” by the electronic media.
Admiral Mehta said he was disturbed by the “extra heavy reporting” on the attacks. “When operations are taking place, you are reporting that two commandos are going inside. They [terrorists] were in live contact with their masters, who were telling them what the channels were reporting. I think it requires a certain amount of restraint in ongoing operations. Do you really have to give minute-by-minute coverage? Media is an enabling instrument. Today it is a disenabling instrument.”
On the media’s coverage of the INS Tabar’s anti-piracy operations off the Gulf of Aden when the warship intercepted and sank a pirated Thai trawler, the Navy chief said he was disappointed. For the media, more “eye catching” was the owner’s claim that was unquestionably accepted.
“The Thai vessel was a pirated trawler. The ship was operating there for a long time. The ship was doing what it should not be doing. You went to his house to interview him. Those reports are now floating worldwide. The media should have asked what the trawler was transporting between Yemen and Oman for such a long time. What cargo was it carrying? If it was low on fuel, how come the fireball was so bright? It was because of all the ammunition that was lying on the ship. There is nothing wrong your Navy has done,” asserted Admiral Mehta.
Referring to frequent reports where he was said to have been pulled up by Ministers, Admiral Mehta said: “You have put my reputation in the dock. By the amount of pulling up I am subjected to, I should have been taller by a couple of feet. I don’t know if that is why I meet Ministers. The press has a responsibility. Be more cautious. I am not asking you to be more careful but you must be more cautious. Are you working for some masters? I leave it to your conscience.”
The Navy chief also criticised two TV correspondents for “breaking their assurance” not to air his interview which was recorded in advance for Navy Day (December 4).
“It was a breach of privilege by these two gentlemen. Just as well that they are not there.” Finding that one was present, he asked the “offender” to tell what was promised. As the journalist sought to give excuses, the Navy chief shot back, “Don’t tell me what happened. The interview was not to be played till day after tomorrow. But both went on air to score brownie points.”
He said the entry of terrorists into Mumbai by a trawler appeared to indicate a “systemic failure” by the law enforcement agencies. “It needs to be taken care of.”
The Navy, he said, was reviving a seven-year-old proposal to ensure better coordination among security agencies and establish a system for identifying Indian fishermen.
“We are looking at creating a proper infrastructure, where all the information we get is exchanged. We had prepared the proposal seven to eight years earlier. We are now pushing it up once again to bring about greater synergy among different forces,” he said.
Admiral Mehta said the present arrangement of naval ships taking care of the security of 200 nautical miles from the coast and the Coast Guard being responsible for the inner layer would continue. The territorial waters would also continue to be looked after by the coastal police.
Good article. Corrupt tabloid channel tv9-Karnataka must read this article. Because tv9 karnataka says it gives code of ethics for its journalists. But today in karnataka TOP CORRUPT
journalists are tv9 journalists.
tv9 simpliy focus sex, glamour, crime, sensational news values.
These news values are purely a tabloid media ethics. Karnataka people never give sorry for this
tv9 corrupt journalists.
inwhat annonimus said true. i am a victim of groupism and corruption in tv9. so i resigned and returned to print media.
tv9 staff-kiran (Crime), ms raghavendra (Warrant), manjunath sanjeev (filmy funda producer-popular for harassing lady anchors and a well known womeniser), input chief lewis, hameed, gowrish-another womeniser, all are corrupt. chetan and aravind shetty got huge money during the elections and said good bye to tv9. its chief mahendra mishra himself is the most corrupted. he was kicked out of aaj tak for accepting Rs 3 lakhs from chandrababu naidu, for harassing womens. he has the charge of murdering his first wife.
there are two groups in tv9. one lead by raghavendra-lewis another lead by ravi kumar-maruti. Ravikumar and Maruti work hard for the channel. But they are upset there. They want to quit if another channel is launched in Karnataka.
god should save tv9.
To the blog moderator...
My name is Shrinivasa M,
Senior Correpondence with Deccan Chronicle...
Some mada people, in my name have wrtn some comments against TV9.
I was with tv9 till last October and it is a great organisation.
I have great respect for Its director Shri Mahendra Mishra, M S Raghavendra and all others..
But stupid people mis used the space provided by u.
Please put some clarification in this regard. Because, personally it damaged my reputation.
Post a Comment